Well, while technically you are right (heh), there is actually an opinion stated on the whole case as well:
We also note that in order to be guilty of accessing “without authorization, or in excess of authorization” under New Jersey law, the Government needed to prove that Auernheimer or Spitler circumvented a code- or password-based barrier to access.
That's not an opinion, that's just a legal citation. The Court expressly avoided an opinion: "we need not
resolve whether Auernheimer’s conduct involved such a
breach..."
We also note that in order to be guilty of accessing “without authorization, or in excess of authorization” under New Jersey law, the Government needed to prove that Auernheimer or Spitler circumvented a code- or password-based barrier to access.